Chapter Two: Existing Conditions Tredyffrin Township

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Chapter Two: Existing Conditions Tredyffrin Township Chapter Two: Existing Conditions SECTION 2.1: INTRODUCTION Tredyffrin Township is located in the middle of an area known as the Great Valley, in east-central Chester County, about 20 miles west of central Philadelphia. The surrounding municipalities are East Whiteland Township, Charlestown Township, Schuylkill Township, Upper Merion Township, Easttown Township, Radnor Township and Willistown Township. The most prominent physical feature of the Township is topography that contains the North Valley and South Valley Hills with a broad valley lying between them. While the valley includes gently sloping hills and creeks, the uplands associated with the North and South Valley Hills include steep grades and ravines. A network of waterways traverses the Township, most notably Valley Creek, and Trout Creek, and their many associated tributaries. The land along these waterways is also the most common incidence of steeply sloping land. The Township contains approximately 20 square miles (12,698 acres) of land area and measures just over nine miles east to west and about 3.75 miles from north to south. Chapter Two describes Tredyffrin Township as it is today and begins to consider the future of the Township based on trends from the recent past and forecasts for tomorrow. This exploration investigates the Township’s natural and built environment and analyzes changes in population, housing and employment, including forecasts for future growth and change. Grounded in an understanding of today’s conditions, and how they have occurred over time, this chapter sets the stage for an intelligent exploration of the possibilities for the future in subsequent chapters. The data, mapping and discussion included in the following sections are the result of months of data collection, analysis, and coordination with the Steering Committee, Tredyffrin Township staff, and members of the community at large. The analysis included in this chapter was developed to identify the existing conditions in Tredyffrin Township, in order to consider how to develop policies and strategies that will maintain residents’ quality of life. SECTION 2.2: EXISTING LAND USE Current land uses in the Township represent a diverse mixture, with several recognizable geographic patterns that have been defined by the transportation corridors that run the breadth of the Township. The most visually prominent pattern is the substantial office and retail development that runs along the US Route 202 corridor. To Tredyffrin Township Comprehensive Plan 8 Chapter Two: Existing Conditions EXISTING LAND USE the north of this corridor, low density residential development is widespread. The land south of the US Route 202 corridor (excepting areas along US Route 30) is predominately residential development, though it is to varying degrees more compact than the development located in the northern section of Tredyffrin Township. The US Route 30 corridor is substantially retail development, though some mixed-use development exists as well. Other important land use features include: the Valley Forge National Historical Park, partially located within the boundaries of Tredyffrin Township in its northern section; significant open space preserves that have been acquired by the Open Land Conservancy, predominately in the western and northwestern portion of the Township; and, the Chesterbrook development, an innovative 1980s mixed-use, higher density development located in the north-central portion of the Township. The examination of how land is currently used in Tredyffrin Township serves as the basis for discussions about the future. It is through an analysis of existing conditions that we can understand current land use. It also prepares us for a discussion of what might change in the future, and how land use may be guided to produce positive results for the Township. The existing land use inventory, as depicted in Figure 2.2.1, was developed from information provided by Tredyffrin Township, itself derived from Chester County tax assessment data. This base information was then updated and revised by the consultant team through the use of 2005 aerial photography, field verification, and using the local knowledge of municipal staff and the members of the Steering Committee. The existing land use map uses color to differentiate land uses. It depicts uses that relate to the more structured, built environment such as lands used for residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional development, as well as recreational, transportation and utility use. It also includes areas not defined by urban uses such as agricultural, vacant and open space land. Residential Use Historically, Tredyffrin Township was predominantly agricultural, with several crossroad villages strung along Lancaster Pike. During the 1950s and 1960s the Township experienced rapid residential growth, followed by a decline in the rate of growth in the 1970s. The 1980s saw strong residential growth followed by moderate population gains Tredyffrin Township Comprehensive Plan 9 Chapter Two: Existing Conditions EXISTING LAND USE in the 1990s. The pace of residential growth has slowed partly because much of the most developable lands have been converted to residential use. Today, residential land uses cover about half of the Township or just over 6,200 acres; single-family detached residential units use the majority of that acreage. The pattern and intensity of residential use follows the evolution of the Township’s identity. The densest residential areas are generally located along Lancaster Avenue, where they developed as extensions of the original settlements. Exceptions include the higher density residential development that is part of the Chesterbrook development, built in the 1980s in the heart of Tredyffrin Township, just north of US Route 202. As the Township moved away from its agricultural focus, natural and agricultural lands were generally converted to low density residential use in a wide band that extends north from Lancaster Avenue to the US Route 202 corridor. Residential development of similar densities also exists north of the US Route 202 corridor and east of Valley Forge Road. Very low density residential development is widespread in the northwestern portion of the Township. Single-family attached and multi-family residential developments are scattered in the areas south of the US Route 202 corridor and are generally located closer to Lancaster Avenue. The exception to this pattern is higher density attached residential units located in the Chesterbrook development. Commercial Use The largest concentration of commercial land use is along the US Route 202 corridor, where the high accessibility to the regional transportation network makes this area attractive for this type of development. In addition, there are concentrations of commercial development along Lancaster Avenue. While Lancaster Avenue is generally a continuous commercial corridor throughout Tredyffrin and Easttown Townships, the Paoli and Strafford areas show more focused and substantial commercial development. Commercial development comprises almost 11% or about 1,350 acres of land within the Township. Retail and commercial services are located along Lancaster Avenue, in the Gateway Shopping Center (located at the intersection of Valley Forge Road and Swedesford Road), in shopping centers along Route 202 (Valley Fair Shopping Center and others), and within the Chesterbrook Shopping Center. Many of these locations have auto-oriented retail uses, though Lancaster Avenue locations associated with R5 Tredyffrin Township Comprehensive Plan 10 Chapter Two: Existing Conditions EXISTING LAND USE Regional Rail stations and bus routes provide some opportunity for non-motorized access and pedestrian circulation to these establishments. Although some office developments are located along Lancaster Avenue, the majority is located along the US Route 202 corridor. Substantial concentrations are located in the vicinity of Devon Park Drive in the eastern section of the Township, at the Chesterbrook Boulevard intersection with US Route 202 in the center of the Township, and in the vicinity of Cedar Hollow Road along Tredyffrin Township’s western border with East Whiteland Township. These office developments vary in age and range from smaller scale, single-story buildings generally in the Devon Park area, to newer three- story office complexes in the Chesterbrook area. The majority of these office complexes are accessed by automobile, though some bus routes travel through this area; privately operated shuttles provide a link to the AMTRAK and SEPTA R5 train lines. Industrial Use Industrial uses comprise less than half a percent of the existing Township acreage, or just less than 50 acres. Industrial uses include enclosed manufacturing facilities located within the US Route 202 corridor. Institutional Use Public and private institutional uses are dispersed throughout Tredyffrin Township and use about three percent of the land, or close to 400 acres. They include public and private educational institutions, municipal buildings, public libraries, police and fire protection facilities and places of worship. Transportation and Utilities A network of highways, roads, and both passenger and freight rail are visually apparent on Tredyffrin’s geography. These include the Pennsylvania Turnpike, US Route 202, US Route 30 (Lancaster Avenue), PA 252, and PA 422. Other prominent transportation features include the AMTRAK rail line that closely parallels Lancaster Avenue and is used by the SEPTA
Recommended publications
  • Warner Spur Multi-Use Trail Master Plan
    Warner Spur Multi-Use Trail Master Plan Chester County Tredyffrin Township Prepared by: December 2019 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Prepared for the In partnership with Tredyffrin Township Chester County Board of Commissioners Plan Advisory Committee Michelle Kichline Zachary Barner, East Whiteland Township Kathi Cozzone Mahew Baumann, Tredyffrin Township Terence Farrell Les Bear, Indian Run Road Association Stephen Burgo, Tredyffrin Township Carol Clarke, Great Valley Association Consultants Rev. Abigail Crozier Nestlehu, St. Peter's Church McMahon Associates, Inc. Jim Garrison, Vanguard In association with Jeff Goggins, Trammel Crow Advanced GeoServices, Corp. Rachael Griffith, Chester County Planning Commission Glackin Thomas Panzak, Inc. Amanda Lafty, Tredyffrin Township Transportation Management Association of Tim Lander, Open Land Conservancy of Chester County Chester County (TMACC) William Martin, Tredyffrin Township Katherine McGovern, Indian Run Road Association Funding Aravind Pouru, Atwater HOA Dave Stauffer, Chester County Department of Facilities and Parks Grant funding provided from the William Penn Brian Styche, Chester County Planning Commission Foundation through the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission’s Regional Trails Program. Warner Spur Multi-Use Trail Master Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 | Background 3 | Conceptual Improvement Plan Introduction 1-1 Conceptual Improvement Plan 3-1 History and Previous Plans 1-1 Conceptual Design Exhibits for Key 3-8 Connections and Crossings Study Area 1-2 Public and Emergency
    [Show full text]
  • Geospatial Analysis: Commuters Access to Transportation Options
    Advocacy Sustainability Partnerships Fort Washington Office Park Transportation Demand Management Plan Geospatial Analysis: Commuters Access to Transportation Options Prepared by GVF GVF July 2017 Contents Executive Summary and Key Findings ........................................................................................................... 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Sources ...................................................................................................................................................... 6 ArcMap Geocoding and Data Analysis .................................................................................................. 6 Travel Times Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 7 Data Collection .......................................................................................................................................... 7 1. Employee Commuter Survey Results ................................................................................................ 7 2. Office Park Companies Outreach Results ......................................................................................... 7 3. Office Park
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Struble Trail Feasibility Study Chester County, Pennsylvania On
    Northern Struble Trail Feasibility Study Chester County, Pennsylvania On the Brandywine Creek DECEMBER 2015 Northern Struble Trail Feasibility Study Chester County, Pennsylvania BRC-TAG-19-129 December 2015 This study was financed in part by The William Penn Foundation and in part CHESTER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS: by a grant from the Community Conservation Partnerships Program Grants Terence Farrell Cycle 2015-2016, Keystone Recreation, Park and Conservation Fund, under the Kathi Cozzone administration of the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Michelle Kichline Resources, Bureau of Recreation and Conservation. In-kind support is also acknowledged from Chester County Planning Department STUDY COMMITTEE MEMBERS: and the Brandywine Conservancy. Catherine Tomlinson, Chester Co. Park and Recreation Board and Upper Uwchlan Township Supervisor Betty Randzin, Wallace Township Manager Barbara D’Angelo, Wallace Township Supervisor Mary Wasko, Wallace Township Trail Preservation Board Michael Wagoner, East Brandywine Township Planning Commission Sandra Moser, East Brandywine Township Planning Commission Steve Landes, Honey Brook Township Manager (formerly Toni Antonini) Susan Ward, West Nantmeal Township Board of Supervisors James Wassell, Manager Marsh Creek State Park Robert Bonney, Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission; Struble Lake Jeanne Jenzano, Council member Honey Brook Borough Joe Stoyack, Upper Uwchlan Township Supervisor John Goodall, Agricultural protection specialist with Brandywine Conservancy Beth Burnam, Consulting
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Comprehensive Plan Update
    2020 Comprehensive Plan Update UPPER FREDERICK TOWNSHIP Montgomery County, PA Updated November 2020 by Tackett Planning, Incorporated Originally prepared January 2008 by CHPlanning Limited Upper Frederick Township Comprehensive Plan Upper Frederick Township Comprehensive Plan Upper Frederick Township Comprehensive Plan UPPER FREDERICK TOWNSHIP OFFICIALS BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Troy Armstrong, Chairman William Tray, Vice-Chairperson Sean Frisco, Member TOWNSHIP MANAGER Jackie Tallon PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS Richard Buckman, Chairman Joseph Buick Robert Keenan William O’Donnell Jared Landis Township Building 3205 Big Road Obelisk, Pennsylvania 19492 Upper Frederick Township Comprehensive Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS: Chapter 1: Introduction & History...................................................................................... 2 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Community Background ...................................................................................... 2 1.3 Regional Setting .................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Population ........................................................................................................... 7 1.5 Community Issues Survey .................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2: Resource Protection .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Keystone Fund Projects by Applicant (1994-2017) Propose DCNR Contract Requeste D Region Applicant Project Title # Round Grant Type D Award Allocatio Funding Types
    Keystone Fund Projects by Applicant (1994-2017) Propose DCNR Contract Requeste d Region Applicant Project Title # Round Grant Type d Award Allocatio Funding Types Alverthorpe Manor BRC-PRD- Region 1 Abington Township Cultural Park (6422) 11-3 11 Development $223,000 $136,900 Key - Community Abington Township TAP Trail- Development BRC-PRD- Region 1 Abington Township (1101296) 22-171 22 Trails $90,000 $90,000 Key - Community Ardsley Wildlife Sanctuary- BRC-PRD- Region 1 Abington Township Development 22-37 22 Development $40,000 $40,000 Key - Community Briar Bush Nature Center Master Site Plan BRC-TAG- Region 1 Abington Township (1007785) 20-12 20 Planning $42,000 $37,000 Key - Community Pool Feasibility Studies BRC-TAG- Region 1 Abington Township (1100063) 21-127 21 Planning $15,000 $15,000 Key - Community Rubicam Avenue Park KEY-PRD-1- Region 1 Abington Township (1) 1 01 Development $25,750 $25,700 Key - Community Demonstration Trail - KEY-PRD-4- Region 1 Abington Township Phase I (1659) 4 04 Development $114,330 $114,000 Key - Community KEY-SC-3- Region 1 Aldan Borough Borough Park (5) 6 03 Development $20,000 $2,000 Key - Community Ambler Pocket Park- Development BRC-PRD- Region 1 Ambler Borough (1102237) 23-176 23 Development $102,340 $102,000 Key - Community Comp. Rec. & Park Plan BRC-TAG- Region 1 Ambler Borough (4438) 8-16 08 Planning $10,400 $10,000 Key - Community American Littoral Upper & Middle Soc/Delaware Neshaminy Watershed BRC-RCP- Region 1 Riverkeeper Network Plan (3337) 6-9 06 Planning $62,500 $62,500 Key - Rivers Keystone Fund Projects by Applicant (1994-2017) Propose DCNR Contract Requeste d Region Applicant Project Title # Round Grant Type d Award Allocatio Funding Types Valley View Park - Development BRC-PRD- Region 1 Aston Township (1100582) 21-114 21 Development $184,000 $164,000 Key - Community Comp.
    [Show full text]
  • Circuit Pipeline - November 2015
    Circuit Pipeline - November 2015 Philadelphia Trunk Trail Trail Segment Type Mileage County Study Cynwyd Parkside Cynwyd Trail Trail 1.50 Philadelphia In progress Cresheim Cresheim Creek Trail Trail 2.20 Philadelphia Complete Tacony Frankford Greenway Trail, Phase 3 Trail 0.84 Philadelphia In progress Pennypack Fox Chase Lorimer Trail 0.42 Philadelphia In progress Pennypack State & Rhawn Trail 0.06 Philadelphia Complete SRT Ivy Ridge Trail Trail 0.60 Philadelphia Complete SRT Wissahickon Gateway Trail 0.31 Philadelphia Complete SRT Boardwalk from Christian to Gray's Ferry Trail 0.42 Philadelphia Complete SRT Bartram's to Fort Mifflin Trail 3.58 Philadelphia In progress ECG K&T, Phase 2 Trail 0.85 Philadelphia Complete ECG Delaware Avenue Extension, Phase 1B Trail 0.28 Philadelphia Complete ECG Sugar House Casino to Penn Treaty Park Trail 0.30 Philadelphia Complete ECG Spring Garden Street Greenway Cycletrack 2.15 Philadelphia Complete ECG Delaware River Trail Sidepath - Washington to Spring Garden Trail 1.90 Philadelphia Complete ECG Cobbs Creek Segment B Trail 0.80 Philadelphia Complete/On-going Total trail mileage 16.21 Bucks Trunk Trail Trail Segment Type Mileage County Study Neshaminy Upper Neshaminy Creek Trail -- Turk Rd to Dark Hollow Rd Trail 6.10 Bucks Complete Neshaminy Upper Neshaminy Creek Trail -- Chalfont/New Britain Gap Trail 1.35 Bucks Complete D&L/ECG Delaware Canal Tunnel (Falls Township) Tunnel 0.05 Bucks ? ECG Bridge Street Crossing Structure 0.10 Bucks Complete ECG Bensalem - Cramer to Birch Trail/Sidepath 0.38 Bucks
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania's Return on Investment in the Keystone Recreation, Park
    Pennsylvania’s Return on Investment in the Keystone Recreation, Park, and Conservation Fund Pennsylvania’s Return on Investment in the Keystone Recreation, Park, and Conservation Fund Right cover photo: Western Pennsylvania Conservancy. Printed on 100% recycled paper. ©2013 The Trust for Public Land. Project support was provided by The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act, and the Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds (FPW) in partnership with Richard King Mellon Foundation. FPW is an environmental nonprofit serving Pennsylvania’s water quality needs. To learn more about FPW, visit pennsylvaniawatersheds.org. Table of Contents Executive Summary 6 Introduction 9 Conservation 12 Investment in Land and Water Conservation 12 Natural Goods and Services 12 Highlighting the Economic Value of Natural Goods and Services 14 Return on Investment 16 Methodology 16 Results 17 Tourism and Outdoor Recreation 18 Visitor Spending 18 Outdoor Recreation 19 Hunting, Fishing, and Wildlife Watching 20 State Parks 21 Enhanced Property Values 22 Reduced Local Taxes 22 Quality of Life 23 Leveraged Private and Local Dollars 23 Parks, Trails, and Recreation 24 Job Creation 24 Visitor Spending 25 Enhanced Property Values 26 Cultural Institutions 28 Libraries 28 Job Creation 28 Additional Economic Benefits 28 Historic Preservation 31 Direct Economic Impact 31 Tourism 31 Property Values 33 Higher Education 33 Conclusion 34 References 35 Appendix: Methodology 38 Executive Summary The Trust for Public Land conducted an economic analysis of the return on Pennsylvania’s investment in land and water conservation through the Keystone Recreation, Park, and Conservation Fund and found that every $1 invested in land conservation returned $7 in natural goods and services to the Pennsylvania economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Chester Valley Trail West Feasibility Study and Master Plan
    Chester Valley Trail West Feasibility Study and Master Plan Public Meeting 2 March 1, 2018 Chester Valley Trail WEST Agenda • Review project progress since last public meeting • Brief project overview • Findings from public survey • Trail planning considerations- opportunities and constraints • Overview of alignment alternatives • Open House- feedback on alignment alternatives Chester Valley Trail WEST Project Schedule Chester Valley Trail WEST Development Process Feasibility/ $ Secure ROW/ Master Plan Easements $ PHASE 1 Design & Bidding & Project Engineering $ Construction $ Completion $ Design & Bidding & Project PHASE 2 Engineering $ Construction $ Completion Chester Valley Trail WEST Project Background Chester Valley Trail WEST Project Background Schuylkill River Trail Harrisburg Lancaster Philadelphia Chester Valley Trail WEST Project Background Schuylkill River Trail Harrisburg Northwest Lancaster Co. Lancaster River Trail Enola Low Chester Grade Trail Valley Trail Philadelphia CHESTER VALLEY TRAIL WEST Chester Valley Trail WEST Project Background Chester Valley Trail Extension Chester Valley Trail WEST Project Background Chester Valley Trail Enola Low Grade Trail 375,000+ annual users 70,000+ users NW Lancaster Co. River Trail River Co. Lancaster NW 150,000+ annual users Chester Valley Trail WEST Trail Towns Trail Towns: • Are walkable and bike-friendly • Have amenities for trail users (bike shops, cafes & restaurants with outdoor seating, hotels/B&Bs, etc.) • Have wayfinding systems for both trails and businesses Frostburg, MD
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Outdoors Ec R the Keystone for Healthy Living Or Do Ut O E Iv Ns He 20 Pre 09– Om 2013 Statewide C
    lan n P tio rea Pennsylvania Outdoors ec R The Keystone for Healthy Living or do ut O e iv ns he 20 pre 09– om 2013 Statewide C www.paoutdoorrecplan.com lan into action. his p ut t o p e t ast d h an om isd w The preparation of this plan was financed in part through a Land and Water ith Conservation Fund planning grant and the plan was approved by the National Park k w Service, U.S. Department of the Interior under the provisions for the Federal Land or w and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (Public Law 88-578). uld We sho National Park Service – Joe DiBello, Jack Howard, David Lange and Roy Cortez September 2009 Contents Acknowledgements........................................................................................................2 Governor’s.Letter............................................................................................................3 Executive.Summary........................................................................................................4 Introduction.....................................................................................................................6 Public.Participation.Process.........................................................................................10 Research.and.Findings:.What.Pennsylvanians.Say.About.Outdoor.Recreation.........12 Goals.and.Recommendations.......................................................................................46 Funding.Needs.and.Recommendations....................................................................... 94
    [Show full text]
  • Susquehanna Greenway & Trail Authority Case Study, August 2014
    Susquehanna Greenway & Trail Authority Case Study August 2014 Susquehanna Greenway Partnership Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Trail Organization Types ............................................................................................................................... 3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Trail Ownership Structures .................................................................. 21 Trail Maintenance ....................................................................................................................................... 23 Potential Cost‐Sharing Options ................................................................................................................... 25 Potential Sources and Uses ......................................................................................................................... 27 Economic Benefits ....................................................................................................................................... 32 Two‐County, Three‐County, and Five‐County Draft Budget Scenarios ...................................................... 38 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................... 54 Attachment 1 .............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 0X0a I Don't Know Gregor Weichbrodt FROHMANN
    0x0a I Don’t Know Gregor Weichbrodt FROHMANN I Don’t Know Gregor Weichbrodt 0x0a Contents I Don’t Know .................................................................4 About This Book .......................................................353 Imprint ........................................................................354 I Don’t Know I’m not well-versed in Literature. Sensibility – what is that? What in God’s name is An Afterword? I haven’t the faintest idea. And concerning Book design, I am fully ignorant. What is ‘A Slipcase’ supposed to mean again, and what the heck is Boriswood? The Canons of page construction – I don’t know what that is. I haven’t got a clue. How am I supposed to make sense of Traditional Chinese bookbinding, and what the hell is an Initial? Containers are a mystery to me. And what about A Post box, and what on earth is The Hollow Nickel Case? An Ammunition box – dunno. Couldn’t tell you. I’m not well-versed in Postal systems. And I don’t know what Bulk mail is or what is supposed to be special about A Catcher pouch. I don’t know what people mean by ‘Bags’. What’s the deal with The Arhuaca mochila, and what is the mystery about A Bin bag? Am I supposed to be familiar with A Carpet bag? How should I know? Cradleboard? Come again? Never heard of it. I have no idea. A Changing bag – never heard of it. I’ve never heard of Carriages. A Dogcart – what does that mean? A Ralli car? Doesn’t ring a bell. I have absolutely no idea. And what the hell is Tandem, and what is the deal with the Mail coach? 4 I don’t know the first thing about Postal system of the United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Frederick Open Space Plan Identified Three Primary Goals
    Upper Frederick Township Open Space Plan UPPER FREDERICK TOWNSHIP OFFICIALS Township Building 3205 Big Road Obelisk, Pennsylvania 19492 TOWNSHIP MANAGER Jackie Tallon BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Robert C. Young, Chairperson Peter D. Webster, Vice-Chairperson Michael J. Frederick OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE Peter D. Webster Jay Discianni Desra Keenan John Plasterer Kevin Murray Upper Frederick Township Open Space Plan Table of Contents Table of Contents....................................................................................................i List of Maps ...........................................................................................................ii Plan Audit..............................................................................................................1 1994 Open Space Plan.......................................................................................1 1994 Plan Goal 1...............................................................................................1 1994 Plan Goal 2...............................................................................................2 1994 Plan Goal 3...............................................................................................2 Chapter 1: Community Background .......................................................................4 Section 1-1: Regional Setting..............................................................................4 Section 1-2: Existing Land Use............................................................................7 Section
    [Show full text]